[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-988?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12486536
]
Hadoop QA commented on HADOOP-988:
----------------------------------
+1, because
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12354892/HADOOP-988-5.patch
applied and successfully tested against trunk revision
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/hadoop/trunk/525290. Results are at
http://lucene.zones.apache.org:8080/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch
> Namenode should use single map for block to its meta data.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-988
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-988
> Project: Hadoop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: dfs
> Reporter: Raghu Angadi
> Assigned To: Raghu Angadi
> Fix For: 0.13.0
>
> Attachments: HADOOP-988-1.patch, HADOOP-988-3.patch,
> HADOOP-988-4.patch, HADOOP-988-5.patch
>
>
> This is a follow up from HADOOP-803. Currently there two maps which have
> similar functionality :
> 1) blockMap : maps block to list of datanodes that contain the block
> 2) activeBlocks : maps block to INode that it blongs to.
> Apart from simplifying, it saves 32 bytes per block and 24 bytes by avoid
> extra block object we currently have for files that exist before Namenode
> starts (see HADOOP-803).
> We could combine these two into something like block to { containingNodes,
> INode, etc }.
> Another option is to get Move INode and list of dataNodes into Block object.
> Another option that requires bigger change is not use Block object but just
> 64 bit BlockId. Then the map would be BlockId to all the block related info.
> I will file another Jira regd not using Block object in NameNode.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
